Search results

Traditional approaches in qualitative research have adopted one research paradigm linked to an established typology. This paper addresses the unconventional application of two research paradigms in one study. A critical realist approach was used to augment a constructivist analysis of data in a research project seeking to explore the meaning that managers in small to medium enterprises (SMEs) attach to hazard identification, the construction of a hazard profile reflective of the business and its use in assisting to manage hazards within the SME's safety management system framework. Critical realism offered a complementary but essential framework to explore causal mechanisms that led to a deeper understanding of the findings by searching for the processes and causality that lay beneath the social and organizational phenomena observed.

This paper compares the two research paradigms in order to seek junctures and apply them to a research project. Analytical tools applied to each research paradigm within the project are presented, followed by a new multiparadigm conceptual model that integrates critical realism and constructivism, providing an original contribution of knowledge to this field of qualitative research.

The adoption of a multiparadigm model enabled not only the interpretation of social phenomena but also the determination of its causality, enabling a more insightful answering of the research question and leading to a deeper insight into the phenomenology that was studied. This research approach widens the boundaries of qualitative inquiry within organizational research by promoting strategies that challenge more traditionally anchored research typologies, and consequently contributes to better research outcomes.

This study was conducted across four organizations. Similar research is encouraged across a greater number of case studies to validate the process of using a constructivist and critical realist paradigm to gain a more insightful understanding of events and their causality.

The comparison of two research paradigms and consequent provision of a conceptual model (Figure 3) provides potential for the development of further multiparadigm models for research projects within the field of organizational management.

This paper has the potential to promote engagement and collaboration between research scholars seeking to explore the use of multiple research paradigms.

Such an approach has not previously been widely discussed or adopted to examine qualitative data, and advances theory in qualitative research. The application of two research paradigms using such an approach can be applied to businesses in a number of different contexts to gain a more insightful understanding of research participant perspectives, observable events arising from those perspectives and their associated causality.

Our multiparadigm software toolset (consisting of BATEV, DEBATER and CyberDELPHI software tools) enables a holistic forecasting exercise, combining some good aspects of various foresight paradigms, based on both panel activities (scenarios, recommendations, policy proposals, etc.) and a large scale e‐collaboration among wide expert base. The e‐collaboration encompasses “via‐net” Delphi survey and software mediation and facilitation, based upon intelligent group decision support paradigm. The combination of multiple paradigms supplies a firm foundation for addressing complex technology foresight problems more objectively. Following a brain‐storming process (assisted by BATEV technology repository, and DEBATER intelligent decision support system for technology assessment) in which potential future opportunities for scientific and technological advances are identified, panels engage in an extensive and collaborative consultation process, using the CyberDELPHI e‐collaboration software. The CyberDELPHI implementation is very useful in reducing the time required to evaluate the experts’ responses and also helps to encourage experts to give as much detail as possible. It has been used succesfully in the preliminary phase of a Regional Programme on Technology Foresight for Latin America, launchad by UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development Organisation) and ICS (International Centre for Science and High Technology).

The dominant strategy discourse projects strategy as rational and calculable. However, leading academics conclude that strategy is “elusive” and “complex”. The purpose of this paper is to unravel strategy's elusiveness and unpack its complexity through empirical hermeneutic investigation.

Strauss' grounded theory is used to investigate leisure and cultural managers' understanding of strategy‐making. Data were collected through multiple interviews with senior managers of a local authority, and the organisation's strategy documents were examined. The grounded theory's transferability to organisations in, and outside, public leisure and culture was provisionally tested.

It was found that in making strategy, managers engage in purposeful, complex processes, here termed “navigational translation” which have mutually impacting relationships with organisational resources, the environment and managers' character, explaining its complexity and elusiveness. The provisional testing of navigational translation's transferability suggests that it has scope beyond public sector leisure and cultural strategy.

As this research focused on theory generation, a main limitation is its small‐scale testing of navigational translation's transferability. Future research could test transferability with more organisations in leisure, culture and other fields.

This explanation provides a robust understanding of strategy that could improve practice. It empowers managers so that they are no longer subjugated to unrealisable expectations that rationalistic strategy tools will work in a complex world.

Navigational translation offers a richer, practitioner‐oriented understanding of strategy, which utilises leading academic explanations from the various, competing and divergent strategy schools into a pragmatic, multiparadigmatic framework.

This chapter examines the potential corelation between technologically led changes in media ecologies and changes in mediated mobilisation compared to the traditional forms of citizen mobilisation, namely political protest mobilisation. Based on previous empirical research on the Aganaktismenoi movement (Zestanaki, 2019), I investigate the effect this new form of mass mobilisation has on participants' political sophistication with an emphasis on the measurable indication or political efficacy, a recognised political communication tool. I argue that mobilising large crowds within an ideological void enabled by the heavily mediatised current environment is becoming a challenging democratic endeavour. This approach opens new possibilities for a multiparadigm, more advanced research on media sociology and political communication, from a critical intellectual perspective.